URGENT: Consultation on Marriage

The Nationalist-led Scottish Government has confirmed that its consultation on gay marriage is open to anyone in England and elsewhere outwith Scotland.

Pro-gay marriage campaigners have been urging people outside of Scotland to respond to the consultation. And now the Scottish Government has publicly confirmed it will accept non-Scottish submissions.

CRITICISM

This move has been criticised by 'Scotland For Marriage,' a group that supports traditional marriage.

This is in spite of Alex Salmond’s SNP conference speech in October which said only the Scottish people should decide Scotland’s independence from the UK. Now, on the issue of same-sex marriage, he is inviting submissions from outside Scotland.

A Scotland for Marriage spokesman said: “Clearly, the pro-gay marriage groups can’t get enough people in Scotland to back their campaign. That’s why they’re desperately asking metropolitan elites in London to bail them out of a consultation flop – and, shamefully, the SNP Government is allowing it. Whatever side of the debate you’re on, this should be a Scottish consultation for the Scottish people.”

END OF CONSULTATION

However, the consultation period expires at midnight tomorrow - Friday, 9 December 2011.

Please respond now by visiting the website of the Christian Institute and answering the questions they have highlighted on their site:

http://www.christian.org.uk/marriagescotland/#wpcf7-f4-p5212-o1

Please indicate "Yes" or "No" to each question. You can also summarise your reasons why you are giving each answer. To help you, here are the answers I have submitted to each of the questions:

Question 10: Do you agree that the law in Scotland should be changed to allow same-sex marriage?

- No

REASON:

Basic teaching on marriage and family life is found in the first two chapters of the Bible, Genesis chapters 1 and 2.

God, in this portion of Genesis, teaches us that, “male and female He created them” (Genesis 1:27). We were created to a plan - male and female complementing each other - and so enabled to enhance each others’ lives and produce and nurture offspring as commanded in Genesis 1:28, “Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth.” This command is repeated to Noah after the Flood (Genesis 8:15-17). Cain and Abel had neither ‘two mommies’ or ‘two daddies,’ but a father and mother. In this they fulfilled God’s own model for family life.

When Jesus, in New Testament times, was questioned about marriage, He referred back to these two chapters at the start of Genesis (Matthew 19:1-12; Mark 10:1-12).

Man has no right to redefine marriage to accommodate homosexual practice, and so contradict the fundamental and historical basis of the institution of marriage. The historic foundation of our society - the great tenets of Bible Christianity - confirms the feeling that is innate within the human psyche that homosexuality is unnatural and sinful, a perversion of God’s created order (Romans 1:26-27).


Question 11: Do you agree that religious bodies and celebrants should not be required to solemnise same-sex marriage?

- Yes

REASON:

The message of the Bible, (which is our only rule of faith and practice), is unmistakable with regard to homosexuality:

• this practice is unnatural and depraved (Romans 1:25-28);

• an abomination to God (Leviticus 18:22, Leviticus 20:13);

• a sin that closes the door of heaven to the one who remains in it (1 Corinthians 6:9&10);

• and is certain to bring upon itself the crushing judgment of the Almighty (Genesis 19, Romans 1:32, Jude 7).

The only way anyone will ever be able to uncover acceptance for the sin of sodomy from either of the biblical testaments is to rewrite them.

To ask a minister who implicitly believes the Bible to be the Word of God - the arbiter in all disputes, his guide and counsellor - to perform a wedding ceremony between two homosexuals would be to commit a gross sin against the revealed will of God in the Scriptures, and cause grievous offence to his own conscience.


Question 1: Do you agree that legislation should be changed so that civil partnerships could be registered through religious ceremonies?

- No

Relationships between homosexual people can never constitute true marriage, therefore legislation should not be changed in order to pretend that they can.

Real Marriage is:

- an institution designed for a man and a woman.

Marriage is not genderless. It is a union of two different sexes, not just a union of two different people. Real marriage (a man and a woman) is not rooted in discrimination. It is rooted in common sense, for the common good. For marriage to flourish in our culture, it must be protected from redefinition; because if marriage can mean anything, it will mean nothing.

- best for children.

While thousands of single mothers and fathers struggle against all odds and earn the respect of people every day, to raise healthy children who become productive citizens, there is but one gold standard for which we should strive as a society – that every child should be reared by a loving mother and father.

- the ultimate solution for our nation’s problems.

Prisons fill, schools fail, and welfare rolls grow because of the breakdown of marriage and shattering of the home. Governments and charities have spent millions of pounds for many decades treating symptoms. It is time for governments, churches, communities and businesses to come together to treat the cause.

- an intimate, healthy relationship.

Real Marriage means communication, commitment, respect and selfless love. These are the keys to a healthy, happy, affair-proof life, “til death do us part.” Successful parenting and warm, enduring bonds with children comes from true intimacy in marriage.

- worth working at.

Divorce and dissatisfaction can be avoided. A good marriage is worth the effort it requires.

- built on faith.

Marriage is a God-designed institution that predates governments, constitutions and laws. Marriage works best when God is the foundation and central unifying presence, and our law foundation is the Ten Commandments.

“Except the LORD build the house, they labour in vain that build it: except the LORD keep the city, the watchman waketh but in vain” (cf. Psalm 127).

‘Gay marriage’ undermines society and the meaning of marriage.


Questions 5 & 7: Do you agree that religious bodies and individual religious celebrants should not be required to register civil partnerships?

- Yes

The subordinate standards of our denomination include the famous Westminster Confession of Faith, formulated by an assembly of godly ministers - “learned, godly and judicious Divines” - in 1646.

These men of clear Reformation principles were commissioned by the British Parliament to write a lengthy statement explaining what the Bible means on issues of church worship, doctrine, government and discipline. Their meetings, over a period of five years, produced the Westminster Confession of Faith. This document was approved by the British Parliament. For almost four centuries, various churches around the world have adopted this Confession (in some cases with some minor modification) as their standards of doctrine, subordinate to the Bible.

In a chapter of this Confession that specifically treats, ‘Of Marriage And Divorce,’ Biblical Marriage is defined in an excellent manner. The following statements appear in this definition:

24.1 Marriage is a union between one man and one woman, designed of God to last so long as they both shall live.

24.2 Marriage is designed for the mutual help of husband and wife; for the safeguarding, undergirding, and development of their moral and spiritual character; for the propagation of children and the rearing of them in the discipline and instruction of the Lord.

24.3 All persons who are able with judgment to give their consent may marry, except within the limits of blood relationship forbidden by Scripture, and such marriages are valid before God in the eyes of the church. But no marriage can be fully and securely Christian in spirit or in purpose unless both partners are committed to a common Christian faith and to a deeply shared intention of building a Christian home. Evangelical Christians should seek as partners in marriage only persons who hold in common a sound basis of evangelical faith.

24.4 Marriage for the Christian has religious as well as civil significance. The distinctive contribution of the church in performing the marriage ceremony is to affirm the divine institution of marriage; to invoke God's blessing upon those who enter into the marital relationship in accordance with his word; to hear the vows of those who desire to be married; and to assure the married partners of God's grace within their new relationship.

24.5 It is the divine intention that persons entering the marriage covenant become inseparably united, thus allowing for no dissolution save that caused by the death of either husband or wife ... .

It is immediately evident from these statements of faith that no provision can be afforded to two males or two females to marry each other. Such a relationship attracts only the punishment, not the approval, of God. The Church is therefore obligated to play no part in such immoral and forbidden unions. For the State to dictate otherwise is to thrust an unwarranted and mischievous imposition upon consciences that are bound by love to God and His Word.


Question 6: Do you consider that religious celebrants should not be allowed to register civil partnerships if their religious body has decided against registering civil partnerships?

- Yes

Both on grounds of democracy and of decency.

The Articles of Faith of the Free Presbyterian Church of Ulster, the denomination to which I belong, requires all ministers and elders to affirm as one part of their Ordination Vows that they, “believe the Presbyterian government and discipline of the Free Presbyterian Church of Ulster to be founded on and agreeable to the Word of God,” and that they, “promise to adhere to it and support it and to yield submission and be in subjection to their brethren as is taught in the Word of God” (cf. Ephesians 5:21, 1 Corinthians 16:16, 1 Peter 5:5).


Question 9: Religious bodies may not wish their premises to be used to register civil partnerships. Do you agree that no legislative provision is required to ensure religious premises cannot be used against the wishes of the relevant religious body?

- No

With the introduction of Sexual Orientation Regulations (2003), the assurance was given to Christians that they still retained the right of free speech that enabled them to articulate what the Bible says about homosexuality. However, a rash of court cases since the advent of this law has shown that Christian Churches will require a legislative shield from civil lawsuits should they deny homosexuals the right to use their facilities for marriage ceremonies.

Also, when the Equality Act (2010) in England was being formulated, a coalition of secular campaigners, gay rights activists, transgender organisations, trade unions and “progressive faith” groups united to remove all religious liberty safeguards from the Bill.

Calling itself the Cutting Edge Consortium (CEC), this group called on Parliament to remove what it calls ‘religious opt-outs’ from the Bill.

The Bill already dramatically narrows safeguards in sexual orientation employment laws which protect the religious liberty of churches and other faith groups.

Any further erosion of the right of Church denominations to abide by Scriptural teaching and live by an informed conscience must be opposed, therefore legislation is required to prevent certain ministers operating against the expressed wishes of their denomination on this issue.